Notice: This is the official website of the All Empires History Community (Reg. 10 Feb 2002)

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Han VS Rome
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 12131415>
Author
  Share Topic Share Topic  Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options
Count Belisarius View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar
Magister Militum

Joined: 25-Jul-2008
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1109 		  Quote Count Belisarius Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Han VS Rome
    Posted: 17-Dec-2008 at 00:23
The cataphractii and/or clibanarii both used composite horsebows that were incredibly powerful and the cataphracts worked very well infantry, and they were used as deep strike troops. On the history channel they made a seg that was the proper guage and thickness and they fired a scorpion bolt at it several times and the bolt bounced off and as you yourself said they could also deflect stone... Uh-oh there went the han crossbow advantage. How exactly would a crossbow be more powerful than a ballista?   


Defenders of Ulthuan, Cult of Asuryan (57 Kills and counting)


Back to Top
Count Belisarius View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar
Magister Militum

Joined: 25-Jul-2008
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1109 		  Quote Count Belisarius Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 17-Dec-2008 at 00:28
The romans also used such cavlary as contarrii and the contarri were used on parthian heavy cavalry with great sucsess 


Defenders of Ulthuan, Cult of Asuryan (57 Kills and counting)


Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18-Dec-2008 at 11:07
Originally posted by Count Belisarius

Bowenmin if a seg can shrug off a direct from a ballista what makes you think a crossbow bolt will get through? also infantry is not heavy the seg only weighs about nine pounds and it is plate armor, the romans also used spiked pits and unlike the han they didn't get stomped into the ground on their first try. The romans had factories for the mass production of military gear, and you skirted around roman cavalry vs. han cavalry. The romans have hundreds of books on warfare. AFAIK the han didn't have acsess to gunpowder or the traction trebuchet also each roman legion has sixty ballista     
 
Smile I understand your argument. as I said, the circumstances depend. The Seg is in actual fact, made of overlapping plates of steel right?
 
In actual fact, Rome's manufacturance  was composed entirely of blacksmiths manufacturing by means of hammer and anvil. although it composed of the most advanced techniques in the known western world, every blacksmith is an individual and their knowledge, experience and techniques vary.
Therefore, the qualities of the segmentas would vary.
 
now, I am gonna really explain in depth from this point on.
 
The Quality of the Seg your wearing is one factor. would you get the best of the best, or just the plain best blacksmith? (only the best are allowed to manufacture segs)
of course, this was a factor.
 
next, The angle the bolt hits you in. This would strongly influence whether it would bounce off the side or you would take a glancing hit. This factor was luck.
 
Therefore, there is still a low probability that you would survive that hit in the battle armour.
 
AAAAAAAAAAAND, on that part about Romans not getting stomped on the ground on the first try, I beg to differ.
Romans had lost a few battles to advanced armies, and yet adopted techniques to counter attack. this is the true adoption of the Roman army.
Did you read my posts? I did not say that the Han always got stomped on their first try.
 
Anyways. The art of war is not the only book on warfare in China. just the bestseller.
 
The Han had already had basic forms of gunpowder. It was inherited from the Qin Dynasty where it was accidentally inherited. although it was not so effective...
It still helped to make seige weapons more deadly.
 
I understand that the ballista was a smaller form of seige weapon. however, I do not think this was the best Roman mini seige weaponary. they do have some forms of smalller catapults, and powerful crossbows called scorpios. These I really like. sixty ballista are not the only things they had.
 
 
NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNOWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW
 
for the big question. how the hell do I think the Han crossbows would pierce the Roman segmenta?
I have asked myself b4 when someone from the Han supporters had asked me. (I was ALL for Roma at that time.)
 
now, to tell you about one aspect of the crossbow, the BOLT.
 
The whole bolt, from tip to tail, was made form steel. This totals up to around 2 to 3 KG.
compared to the pilum, such a small bolt was both harder and stronger than anything the Romans could produce.
 
WHY? The Han steel was produced with the blast furnace and could include the proper carbon content in the steel, making it both damned hard and strong at the same time.
The tip of the bolt was perfectly streamlined by making the whole tip triangular longutudally and lengthitudal (kinda like a pyramaid. ) this allowed the arrow to move uninfluenced by the wind and smash through any armour with great ease. The bad thing is" the more rigid the armour, the more likely it's gonna smash through it.
 
The tips are so precisely manufactured that they are all identical, and intact in a tomb after 2000 years. Their hardness were tested and are all found to be identical.
and yet, the only margin of error they found was by 0.02 mm in one of the arrow tips.
 
Now, summing it up, we use P=MV to calculate the momentum they are fired out at.
AMAZINGClap
 
The strength of the Segmenata armour is that it's rigid enough to be able to block ballista bolts with a certain sucess rate.
Yet, the weakness is that it falls prey to the crossbow bolts, designed to pierce rigid armour
 
 
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18-Dec-2008 at 11:10
Originally posted by Count Belisarius

The romans also used such cavlary as contarrii and the contarri were used on parthian heavy cavalry with great sucsess 
 
YES, I know that pretty well. Those under Traja took out Parthia with relative sucess without loosing many battles. Clap
 
They are a good match for the Han cavalry, if the Roman Cavalry units are at their peak.
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18-Dec-2008 at 11:25
Originally posted by Count Belisarius

The cataphractii and/or clibanarii both used composite horsebows that were incredibly powerful and the cataphracts worked very well infantry, and they were used as deep strike troops. On the history channel they made a seg that was the proper guage and thickness and they fired a scorpion bolt at it several times and the bolt bounced off and as you yourself said they could also deflect stone... Uh-oh there went the han crossbow advantage. How exactly would a crossbow be more powerful than a ballista?   
 
Do you mind using quotes please? they make your post more orgainised, and allows others to know who your talking to .
 
By the way. If the REAL roman scorpion failed to pierce the Segmenata, then the scorpion would be freakin weak.
NO OFFENSE. I watched the video once. I felt insulted, as it's an insult to the technology level of the Roman Scorpio (my favourite Roman Seige instrument!)
The comparism was highly rigged. the bolts aren't even steel tipped. if I remember it right, it was just purely wood. I'd be damed if it left even a mark.
I do admire the Roman army, and yet I refused to adknowlege the docco, as some facts are exegerrated, and some comparisms are highly rigged. (lol, firing wooden bolts in the middle of battle.) Cry
 
Then, I remembered saying in the previous post that the entire Han bolt was made of steel.
 
I went for the Han crossbow over the Roman scorpio not because it was something like the biggest beitch on the battlefield capable of firing the strongest bolts from a handheld weapon.
But the fact that it could fire from something like a gunline. torrent after torrent.  
 
Pointed steel at high velocity in torrents with gunline formations VERSUS Blunt stone fired with seige engines with far slower firing rates.
 
STEEL VS STONE?! you decide.
 
EmbarrassedIt's been very nice debating with You, by the way. THANK YOU FOR REPLYING TO MY POSTS!
 
Back to Top
Count Belisarius View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar
Magister Militum

Joined: 25-Jul-2008
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1109 		  Quote Count Belisarius Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18-Dec-2008 at 16:27
Originally posted by bowenmin

Originally posted by Count Belisarius

Bowenmin if a seg can shrug off a direct from a ballista what makes you think a crossbow bolt will get through? also infantry is not heavy the seg only weighs about nine pounds and it is plate armor, the romans also used spiked pits and unlike the han they didn't get stomped into the ground on their first try. The romans had factories for the mass production of military gear, and you skirted around roman cavalry vs. han cavalry. The romans have hundreds of books on warfare. AFAIK the han didn't have acsess to gunpowder or the traction trebuchet also each roman legion has sixty ballista     
 
Smile I understand your argument. as I said, the circumstances depend. The Seg is in actual fact, made of overlapping plates of steel right?
 
In actual fact, Rome's manufacturance  was composed entirely of blacksmiths manufacturing by means of hammer and anvil. although it composed of the most advanced techniques in the known western world, every blacksmith is an individual and their knowledge, experience and techniques vary.
Therefore, the qualities of the segmentas would vary.
 
now, I am gonna really explain in depth from this point on.
 
The Quality of the Seg your wearing is one factor. would you get the best of the best, or just the plain best blacksmith? (only the best are allowed to manufacture segs)
of course, this was a factor.
 
next, The angle the bolt hits you in. This would strongly influence whether it would bounce off the side or you would take a glancing hit. This factor was luck.
 
Therefore, there is still a low probability that you would survive that hit in the battle armour.
 
 
 
 
NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNOWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW
 
for the big question. how the hell do I think the Han crossbows would pierce the Roman segmenta?
I have asked myself b4 when someone from the Han supporters had asked me. (I was ALL for Roma at that time.)
 
now, to tell you about one aspect of the crossbow, the BOLT.
 
The whole bolt, from tip to tail, was made form steel. This totals up to around 2 to 3 KG.
compared to the pilum, such a small bolt was both harder and stronger than anything the Romans could produce.
 
WHY? The Han steel was produced with the blast furnace and could include the proper carbon content in the steel, making it both damned hard and strong at the same time.
The tip of the bolt was perfectly streamlined by making the whole tip triangular longutudally and lengthitudal (kinda like a pyramaid. ) this allowed the arrow to move uninfluenced by the wind and smash through any armour with great ease. The bad thing is" the more rigid the armour, the more likely it's gonna smash through it.
 
The tips are so precisely manufactured that they are all identical, and intact in a tomb after 2000 years. Their hardness were tested and are all found to be identical.
and yet, the only margin of error they found was by 0.02 mm in one of the arrow tips.
 
Now, summing it up, we use P=MV to calculate the momentum they are fired out at.
AMAZINGClap
 
The strength of the Segmenata armour is that it's rigid enough to be able to block ballista bolts with a certain sucess rate.
Yet, the weakness is that it falls prey to the crossbow bolts, designed to pierce rigid armour
 
 
 
 
This test they fired on the seg from every angle several times also the seg does not vary much as it is (through the era's) made of one type.
 
A Scorpio isn't a crossbow
 
Also a seg works like a suspension system
 
The roman swords were steel and later spathas have been found that are superior to the katana
 
  
Back to Top
Parnell View Drop Down
Suspended
Suspended

Suspended

Joined: 04-Apr-2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1409 		  Quote Parnell Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18-Dec-2008 at 16:36
Good to see you back Count. That was a short retirement.
Back to Top
Count Belisarius View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar
Magister Militum

Joined: 25-Jul-2008
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1109 		  Quote Count Belisarius Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18-Dec-2008 at 16:37
Originally posted by bowenmin

Originally posted by Count Belisarius

The cataphractii and/or clibanarii both used composite horsebows that were incredibly powerful and the cataphracts worked very well infantry, and they were used as deep strike troops. On the history channel they made a seg that was the proper guage and thickness and they fired a scorpion bolt at it several times and the bolt bounced off and as you yourself said they could also deflect stone... Uh-oh there went the han crossbow advantage. How exactly would a crossbow be more powerful than a ballista?   
 
 
By the way. If the REAL roman scorpion failed to pierce the Segmenata, then the scorpion would be freakin weak.
NO OFFENSE. I watched the video once. I felt insulted, as it's an insult to the technology level of the Roman Scorpio (my favourite Roman Seige instrument!)
The comparism was highly rigged. the bolts aren't even steel tipped. if I remember it right, it was just purely wood. I'd be damed if it left even a mark.
I do admire the Roman army, and yet I refused to adknowlege the docco, as some facts are exegerrated, and some comparisms are highly rigged. (lol, firing wooden bolts in the middle of battle.) Cry
 
 
 
I went for the Han crossbow over the Roman scorpio not because it was something like the biggest on the battlefield capable of firing the strongest bolts from a handheld weapon.
But the fact that it could fire from something like a gunline. torrent after torrent.  
 
Pointed steel at high velocity in torrents with gunline formations VERSUS Blunt stone fired with seige engines with far slower firing rates.
 
STEEL VS STONE?! you decide.
 
EmbarrassedIt's been very nice debating with You, by the way. THANK YOU FOR REPLYING TO MY POSTS!
 
 
 
 
You must be thinking of a different test and the scorpion was the right power with the right head against a properly made seg.
 
The romans did not use wooden heads
 
How exactly would something as powerful a han crossbow manage to fire at that rate of speed the romans also had missle troops. The Arcuballista, the cheiroballista, and the manuballista, scorpio, archers, slingers, javelineers (The pilum is supposed to bend when it hits something) stone firing ballista, Onagers.
 
 
 Also The romans didn't just use stone ammo. They also had a ballista that works somewhat like a gatling gun
 
 
So sixty ballistae along with all the other missle support I mentioned. They also used sniper/sharpshooter units. They had an orgnaized intelligence agency. The han crossbows can get through segs. Their cavalry...
 
 I think the han lose 
             
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18-Dec-2008 at 20:44
Originally posted by Count Belisarius

Originally posted by bowenmin

Originally posted by Count Belisarius

The cataphractii and/or clibanarii both used composite horsebows that were incredibly powerful and the cataphracts worked very well infantry, and they were used as deep strike troops. On the history channel they made a seg that was the proper guage and thickness and they fired a scorpion bolt at it several times and the bolt bounced off and as you yourself said they could also deflect stone... Uh-oh there went the han crossbow advantage. How exactly would a crossbow be more powerful than a ballista?   



By the way. If the REAL roman scorpion failed to pierce the Segmenata, then the scorpion would be freakin weak.

NO OFFENSE. I watched the video once. I felt insulted, as it's an insult to the technology level of the Roman Scorpio (my favourite Roman Seige instrument!)

The comparism was highly rigged. the bolts aren't even steel tipped. if I remember it right, it was just purely wood. I'd be damed if it left even a mark.

I do admire the Roman army, and yet I refused to adknowlege the docco, as some facts are exegerrated, and some comparisms are highly rigged. (lol, firing wooden bolts in the middle of battle.) Cry




I went for the Han crossbow over the Roman scorpio not because it was something like the biggest on the battlefield capable of firing the strongest bolts from a handheld weapon.

But the fact that it could fire from something like a gunline. torrent after torrent.


Pointed steel at high velocity in torrents with gunline formations VERSUS Blunt stone fired with seige engines with far slower firing rates.


STEEL VS STONE?! you decide.


EmbarrassedIt's been very nice debating with You, by the way. THANK YOU FOR REPLYING TO MY POSTS!





You must be thinking of a different test and the scorpion was the right power with the right head against a properly made seg.


The romans did not use wooden heads


How exactly would something as powerful a han crossbow manage to fire at that rate of speed the romans also had missle troops. The Arcuballista, the cheiroballista, and the manuballista, scorpio, archers, slingers, javelineers (The pilum is supposed to bend when it hits something) stone firing ballista, Onagers.



Also The romans didn't just use stone ammo. They also had a ballista that works somewhat like a gatling gun



So sixty ballistae along with all the other missle support I mentioned. They also used sniper/sharpshooter units. They had an orgnaized intelligence agency. The han crossbows can get through segs. Their cavalry...


I think the han lose

             




:( I thought you left... dissapointing me :(
Back to Top
eaglecap View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar
Avatar
Retired AE Moderator

Joined: 15-Feb-2005
Location: ArizonaUSA
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3959 		  Quote eaglecap Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18-Dec-2008 at 21:14
I wonder what the point of this thread since since the great distance between Rome and Cathay never allowed this. It seems like a pointless tug of war here but it never happened. I know the Chinese army was defeated by the Arabs in the 8th c. AD, now that would make a good thread. The Romans seemed to have been much more agressive when it came to war but it did not happen anyway. I suppose there is nothing wrong with fantasy. I think another good question is what if... Alexander the Great conquered India and continued on into China- could he have conquered China or Cathay???? Please make another thread for this one, if you want to go that direction. Alexander vs - whatever dynasty was in power then.
Λοιπόν, αδελφοί και οι συμπολίτες και οι στρατιώτες, να θυμάστε αυτό ώστε μνημόσυνο σας, φήμη και ελευθερία σας θα ε
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19-Dec-2008 at 06:46
Originally posted by Count Belisarius

Originally posted by bowenmin

Originally posted by Count Belisarius

The cataphractii and/or clibanarii both used composite horsebows that were incredibly powerful and the cataphracts worked very well infantry, and they were used as deep strike troops. On the history channel they made a seg that was the proper guage and thickness and they fired a scorpion bolt at it several times and the bolt bounced off and as you yourself said they could also deflect stone... Uh-oh there went the han crossbow advantage. How exactly would a crossbow be more powerful than a ballista?   
 
 
By the way. If the REAL roman scorpion failed to pierce the Segmenata, then the scorpion would be freakin weak.
NO OFFENSE. I watched the video once. I felt insulted, as it's an insult to the technology level of the Roman Scorpio (my favourite Roman Seige instrument!)
The comparism was highly rigged. the bolts aren't even steel tipped. if I remember it right, it was just purely wood. I'd be damed if it left even a mark.
I do admire the Roman army, and yet I refused to adknowlege the docco, as some facts are exegerrated, and some comparisms are highly rigged. (lol, firing wooden bolts in the middle of battle.) Cry
 
 
 
I went for the Han crossbow over the Roman scorpio not because it was something like the biggest on the battlefield capable of firing the strongest bolts from a handheld weapon.
But the fact that it could fire from something like a gunline. torrent after torrent.  
 
Pointed steel at high velocity in torrents with gunline formations VERSUS Blunt stone fired with seige engines with far slower firing rates.
 
STEEL VS STONE?! you decide.
 
EmbarrassedIt's been very nice debating with You, by the way. THANK YOU FOR REPLYING TO MY POSTS!
 
 
 
 
You must be thinking of a different test and the scorpion was the right power with the right head against a properly made seg.
 
The romans did not use wooden heads
 
How exactly would something as powerful a han crossbow manage to fire at that rate of speed the romans also had missle troops. The Arcuballista, the cheiroballista, and the manuballista, scorpio, archers, slingers, javelineers (The pilum is supposed to bend when it hits something) stone firing ballista, Onagers.
 
 
 Also The romans didn't just use stone ammo. They also had a ballista that works somewhat like a gatling gun
 
 
So sixty ballistae along with all the other missle support I mentioned. They also used sniper/sharpshooter units. They had an orgnaized intelligence agency. The han crossbows can get through segs. Their cavalry...
 
 I think the han lose 
             
 
AH! a prompt reply as usual.
 
You speak as though the Han have nothing to counter our legions. they must not be underestimated.
 
As for the part that you said that the Romans did not just use stone projectiles, were you assuming I was saying that the Romans have no expertise with steel projectiles. You misunderstood me, I just said that firing wooden heads at a segmenata was highly rediculous, (whatevaitzspelled) and used the battlefield scenerio as an example.
 
I understand MUCH about the Roman infantry. I dare not say I understand more than you, but please respect the Han more.
 
If you remembered, I have had always, in this debate, told the Roman supporters to have more respect for the Han, and vice versa for the Han. Sleepy
 
It's pretty damned boring to say the same things over and over again.
It's proven in firing tests that the Han crossbows could pierce segmentas.
We are not the only people who have an interest in this debate. the professionals too, are.
 
By the way, after doing some real comparisms between the scorpio and the Han crossbow, I kinda lost my hype on the Scorpio. I really thought it freakin weak now.
Could you change my mind for me, please?
 
If you think that some Roman counterparts are better than the Han, feel free to argue about it , yet you must understand that the phrase
"would win "
is naive.
There are no certainties in battle. However good your army is, there are certian things that may shift aginst your favour. there is no garantee a side would lose or win definally (unless the battle is too damned one sided)
 
Therefore, next time you argue (which must be today or tomorrow) I suggest you use that statement " THEREFORE, THE ROMANS HAVE AN ADVANTAGE OF............ OVER THE HAN."
 
This is the proper way to state an argument here.
 
 
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19-Dec-2008 at 06:48
And oh yes, I must remind you to remove your previous post in my quote, as it gets messy if you keep accumulating previous posts in the quotes
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19-Dec-2008 at 06:53
I forgot to mention somethin.
 
see the way in the movies how they reload muskets in different rowes, while the front fow shoots?
 
that's how they do it. one of the crossbow units' pirioties is to prevent the enemy unit from closing in by firing continous shots at them.
 
The crossbow units, if left unsupported by other melee or seige weaponary, are vulnerable to close combat, which they are freaking weak at.
 
Therefore, if the Legion manages to get close enough to wreak havoc, the Crossbowmen, who are more likely inexperienced conscripts, are screwed. Ouch
 
Even with the bayonet on, they'd be waving sticks with knives on them against the Romans. hahahahahahahahahahahaaaaaaaaaa (evil laughter)
This is one good way to beat the Han. I think I would go with the Romans from here on.
Back to Top
Count Belisarius View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar
Magister Militum

Joined: 25-Jul-2008
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1109 		  Quote Count Belisarius Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19-Dec-2008 at 17:04
Originally posted by bowenmin

Originally posted by Count Belisarius

Originally posted by bowenmin

Originally posted by Count Belisarius

  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
              
 
AH! a prompt reply as usual.
 
You speak as though the Han have nothing to counter our legions. they must not be underestimated.
 
As for the part that you said that the Romans did not just use stone projectiles, were you assuming I was saying that the Romans have no expertise with steel projectiles. You misunderstood me, I just said that firing wooden heads at a segmenata was highly rediculous, (whatevaitzspelled) and used the battlefield scenerio as an example.
 
I understand MUCH about the Roman infantry. I dare not say I understand more than you, but please respect the Han more.
 
If you remembered, I have had always, in this debate, told the Roman supporters to have more respect for the Han, and vice versa for the Han. Sleepy
 
It's pretty damned boring to say the same things over and over again.
It's proven in firing tests that the Han crossbows could pierce segmentas.
We are not the only people who have an interest in this debate. the professionals too, are.
 
By the way, after doing some real comparisms between the scorpio and the Han crossbow, I kinda lost my hype on the Scorpio. I really thought it freakin weak now.
Could you change my mind for me, please?
 
If you think that some Roman counterparts are better than the Han, feel free to argue about it , yet you must understand that the phrase
"would win "
is naive.
There are no certainties in battle. However good your army is, there are certian things that may shift aginst your favour. there is no garantee a side would lose or win definally (unless the battle is too damned one sided)
 
Therefore, next time you argue (which must be today or tomorrow) I suggest you use that statement " THEREFORE, THE ROMANS HAVE AN ADVANTAGE OF............ OVER THE HAN."
 
This is the proper way to state an argument here.
 
 
 
 
 
What tests? also the test I saw they used a narrow metal head, Um, I wouldn't underestimate the scorpio for one thing you have a bolt that is way heavier and bigger than a han bolt, also their power is amazing, what about all the other stuff I pointed out?  
Back to Top
Count Belisarius View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar
Magister Militum

Joined: 25-Jul-2008
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1109 		  Quote Count Belisarius Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19-Dec-2008 at 17:09
Originally posted by bowenmin

I forgot to mention somethin.
 
see the way in the movies how they reload muskets in different rowes, while the front fow shoots?
 
that's how they do it. one of the crossbow units' pirioties is to prevent the enemy unit from closing in by firing continous shots at them.
 
The crossbow units, if left unsupported by other melee or seige weaponary, are vulnerable to close combat, which they are freaking weak at.
 
Therefore, if the Legion manages to get close enough to wreak havoc, the Crossbowmen, who are more likely inexperienced conscripts, are screwed. Ouch
 
Even with the bayonet on, they'd be waving sticks with knives on them against the Romans. hahahahahahahahahahahaaaaaaaaaa (evil laughter)
This is one good way to beat the Han. I think I would go with the Romans from here on.
 
 
 
The crossbow I think is somewhat over rated (not saying it's a bad weapon, just it's the be all end all) Also muskets were extremly slow, something one volley in two minutes and it takes good cavalry about ten seconds to get across the field, fifteen in bad conditions also the han bolts can't get through roman seg's not to mention all the other advantages the legion has 
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-Dec-2008 at 01:05
 
 
What tests? also the test I saw they used a narrow metal head, Um, I wouldn't underestimate the scorpio for one thing you have a bolt that is way heavier and bigger than a han bolt, also their power is amazing, what about all the other stuff I pointed out?  
 
I did not recall telling you that a scorpio is a crossbow, neither did I friggin compare the two, apart from the roles they serve.
 
Now I am going for the Romans. but, I seriously doubt the Roman supremecy in some fields after I did thorough research on the Han.
 
Ranged artillery, the Han seige engines could aim DIRECTLY for the Roman ones. They are also more efficient and mobile than you think they are. The Romans would definally have a hard time with these.
 
I did not compare the scorpio with the Han crossbow, why？
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-Dec-2008 at 01:34
[/QUOTE]
The crossbow I think is somewhat over rated (not saying it's a bad weapon, just it's the be all end all) Also muskets were extremly slow, something one volley in two minutes and it takes good cavalry about ten seconds to get across the field, fifteen in bad conditions also the han bolts can't get through roman seg's not to mention all the other advantages the legion has 
[/QUOTE]
 

The crossbow is only underestimated by the roman side in every debate. And the seg is overrated.

Please understand that the periods before the Han devaloped heavier and heavier armour. This was the beginning of the warring states. Then, the crossbow made heavy armour go down the dumps. As I said, the more heavy or rigid the armour, it’s more easy for the Crossbow to penetrate. That’s why the seg is especailly vulnerable to that.

 

To fight againt the Han, we cannot use any more heavy formations. Spread out, use more ranged weaponary, or we get mown down.. Trust me, their crossbows come in different torson strengths, some are reloaded with similar methods to the scropio, and must be mounted to be fired. I compared the torson strengths of the scorpio and the better Han crossbows, and guess what? The Han ones are stronger. Lets not go into so much detail.

 

You said that Muskets are extremely slow, true. Yet I never said that their crossbows are as slow as muskets. They are much faster reloading, in actual fact.

 

And you said that the Roman cavalry could be fast. True. They wouldn’t be so happy when they are intercepted by the Han cavalry, or a booby trap, when they are going too fast. To CHARGE straight at the enemy is a stupid strategy worthy of barbarians. Convey your argument in another way.

 

Advantages, what advantages.

 
Back to Top
Count Belisarius View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar
Magister Militum

Joined: 25-Jul-2008
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1109 		  Quote Count Belisarius Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-Dec-2008 at 03:54
I never said anything about comparisons.
 
Heavy armor is a misnomer full armor would be a better term and you ignored the fact that the seg works like a suspension system and was fired at from every angle using a weapon far more powerful than a crossbow and every time the bolt bounced off
 
Give me solid evidence of a stronger crossbow and one that can be drawn by one man and still put out a high rate of fire
 
Don't underestimate the cavalry read about the hussars sometime 
 
 
Roman artillery is also very accurate, read what I told you about snipers
 
What about the auxilia? The Ballistae? The missle troops? 
 
Advantages? read my posts
 
Also Han victory seems to hinge on missle weapons... That can't get through roman segs. Uh-oh, the han might want to retrieve their full armor 
 
 
 
Back to Top
ulrich von hutten View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar
Avatar
Court Jester

Joined: 01-Nov-2005
Location: Germany
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3638 		  Quote ulrich von hutten Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-Dec-2008 at 05:54
Originally posted by Count Belisarius

... I guess that's it 
  
 
and, Kinder Care Center still an option for you?

Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-Dec-2008 at 10:05
someone just keeps going on about segmenatas. It's pissin me off. I'm a leaving.
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 12131415>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.56a [Free Express Edition]
Copyright ©2001-2009 Web Wiz

This page was generated in 0.070 seconds.